People v. Bundscho
This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 03409 (People v. Bundscho) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
| People v Bundscho |
| 2025 NY Slip Op 03409 |
| Decided on June 6, 2025 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on June 6, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: CURRAN, J.P., MONTOUR, SMITH, DELCONTE, AND HANNAH, JJ.
160 KA 24-00086
v
NATHAN BUNDSCHO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
ERICKSON WEBB SCOLTON & HAJDU, LAKEWOOD (LYLE T. HAJDU OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
NATHAN BUNDSCHO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT PRO SE.
MICHAEL J. KEANE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (MICHAEL J. HILLERY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Deborah A. Haendiges, J.), rendered September 12, 2023. The judgment convicted defendant upon a plea of guilty of criminal contempt in the second degree (two counts).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of two counts of criminal contempt in the second degree (Penal Law § 215.50 [3]). We conclude on this record that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Simpson, 232 AD3d 1266, 1266 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 1082 [2025]; People v Foumakoye, 229 AD3d 1380, 1380 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 970 [2024]; People v Roberto, 224 AD3d 1367, 1367-1368 [4th Dept 2024]). Contrary to defendant's contention in his main and pro se supplemental briefs, defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes our review of his challenge to the severity of his sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255-256 [2006]; cf. People v Adams, 93 AD3d 1082, 1082-1083 [3d Dept 2012]).
We have considered the remaining contentions in defendant's pro se supplemental brief, and we conclude that none warrants modification or reversal of the judgment.
Entered: June 6, 2025
Ann Dillon Flynn
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2025 NY Slip Op 03409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bundscho-nyappdiv-2025.